thanks for watching. tonight, the explosion, the fire, the death and destruction. new evidence it might have been prevented. we've learned a california utility knew a gas pipeline was aging, planned to upgrade a portion of it, even charged their customers to do the work but that work never got done. we're keeping them honest. also tonight, christine o'donnell's stunning upset in delaware's senate race. the tea party's growing power, and why today so many republican party leaders who lined up against her before the primary are now saying they're embracing her. at least in public. congressman ron paul joins us live. and later, why pennsylvania's governor is so embarrassed. it comes down to this question, how would you feel if you found out government was spying on you, reporting you to local police as a potential threat just because you were taking part in a peaceful protest? it happened in pennsylvania. you won't believe some of the

groups that got targeted. environmentalists, gays, lesbians, even animal lovers. we'll tell you where it happened and how taxpayers got stuck with the bill. a lot to cover tonight but we begin, as always, with "keeping them honest" with an event that didn't have to happen. the huge explosion in san bruno, california, that's incinerated a neighborhood and killed at least four people. we've got new evidence tonight suggesting that this nightmare might have been preventible. the lives lost, the homes destroyed, the explosion and fireball so intense that first responders initially thought a jetliner had crashed. >> we've got multiple houses. we're trying to get close. we have extreme heat. we have possibly several blocks on fire at this time. >> call for fourth alarm for this. looks -- it appears we have a plane down in a neighborhood. multiple structures on fire and we have a fireball still coming out. >> of course they didn't know it wasn't a plane. they didn't know at first it was a gas line. later we would learn a broken

section of the line was more than six decades old. and just today we've learned this, that pg&e, the local utility, knew for three years that the pipeline itself was dangerous. so dangerous they committed to repair a portion of it just a couple miles north of the explosion site, but they did not fix it. and to add insult to injury, pg&e was already getting millions of dollars from utility customers. those millions were meant to be spent doing the work they said they'd do, but they didn't. millions from rate payers who some of them, the same people whose homes are now gone. dan simon did the rpth on this. he, tonight is keeping them honest. dan? >> reporter: the line that exploded last week was laid down in 1948. it was so old that for safety reasons, pacific gas and electric made plans to replace a section of it in south san francisco just a couple miles away. in 2007, it got rate increases to do the work. according to a consumer watch dog group, pg&e got $5 million for the project. but the group called t.u.r.n., the utility reform network, says it never happened.

>> the money is spent on what they call higher priority work. >> reporter: what was that? >> well, you can't track the dollars one by one, but we do know that they spent $62 million more on management incentive bonuses than they had forecasted in 2009. >> reporter: mike florio is a senior attorney for the watchdog. he says pg&e spent the money dedicated to replace the pipeline. so it is now seeking rate increases again, another $5 million to replace the same stretch of pipeline. how do you know this? >> because it's right in the documentation they file with the puc to support their rate cases. you know, if you dig deep enough into these big, thick documents, this is what you find. >> reporter: the california public utilities commission, or

puc, is deciding whether to go along with pg&e's request. those documents provided to cnn by t.u.r.n. say that section of pipe ranks in the top 100 for highest risk of failure. the pg&e documents also say if the replacement of the pipe does not occur, risks associated with this segment will not be reduced. high volume natural gas lines snake through the san bruno neighborhood. pg&e hasn't disclosed exactly where the problematic line is, but as we discovered, much of the line runs right through residential areas. this is another large section of pipeline. this one is about a mile away from where the explosion happened. it is also feet away from many homes. the location of pipelines like this are generally kept secret to literally prevent terrorists from coming in and blowing them up, so it's possible people might be living next to them and not even know it. the only way to tell may be from these yellow sidewalk markers, that, for example, are used to

alert construction crews of danger. according to pg&e, it won't be until 2013 until the section of pipe it identified a few years ago will be replaced. >> if they had fixed that section they said they wanted to fix, maybe they would have found something that led them to look a mile or two south of there. we don't know that. what we do know is the project was slated for 2009. it didn't get done, and now they're proposing to do it again in 2013. >> what is pg&e saying about all this tonight, dan? >> reporter: well, anderson, we asked them repeatedly to provide us with a statement. we finally got one tonight. i'll read it for you in its entirety. it says, quote, pg&e is committed to performing the work necessary to assure the safety of its gas transmission system. accordingly, pg&e is constantly prioritizing its projects using the most recent up to date

information available. in this particular case, pg&e did identify this line section as being a high priority project in its 2008 gas transmission rate case filing. subsequent to that filing, pg&e performed an external corrosion direct assessment in 2009, and based on the updated assessment and the assurance it provided us, we rescheduled the project accordingly. pg&e spent more on its gas transmission program, more than authorized from 2008 to 2009. so the bottom line here with the statement is they're not denying the basic facts of the story they're just saying they looked at their priorities and determined they shifted from 2008 to 2009. >> dan, appreciate the reporting. let's dig deeper now with mark toney of t.u.r.n. the utility reform network. you believe if pg&e had done this work this would have been prevented? >> it's hard to say that exactly. what we do know is that pg&e has a pattern of receiving money for

gas pipe repairs that they said needed to be done, and then spending the money somewhere else. >> where did they spend the money, though? if they're raising money saying we need to repair these things, what are they actually spending it on? >> well, sometimes they spend the money on executive compensation, bonuses. sometimes they spend it on their bottom line. sometimes they spend it on different areas. our main point is that if they have identified a gas pipeline that is -- needs to be repaired, that is at risk of having a leak, and they get money for it, then we expect them to fix those gas lines. >> and are they allowed to do that? are they allowed to say we'll fix this gas line, raise money for it and not do it? is there oversight? >> the california public utilities commission we feel needs to exercise stronger oversight and basically require pg&e and all the utility companies that if they say they're going to fix something, they get the money to fix it, then they darn well better fix it.

>> how bad are pipes out there? for a lot of people all around the country, not just in california, i mean, we don't think about the pipes underground. how old are a lot of these pipes? >> well, a lot of these pipelines are 50, 60 years old or more. and that is a huge concern that people have. what happened in san bruno is a worst case scenario. and pg&e and other companies need to be absolutely vigilant in making sure lines are inspected and where they're found to have trouble to actually fix them and not just say they're going to fix it. >> thank you very much. >> absolutely. >> really disturbing story. let us know what you think. the live chat is up and running. up next, congressman ron paul on rising tea party power after last night's primary upsets. what does it mean for midterms and governing once the elections are over? and the republican big wigs trashing christine o'donnell before last night, today they're singing a different tune. we'll talk with eliot spitzer, alex castellanos and dana lash. ♪

the turn will make you think. ♪ make you re-examine your approach. change your line. innovate. and create one of the world's fastest-reacting suspensions, reading the road 1,000 times per second. it's the turn that leads you somewhere new. introducing the new 2011 cts-v coupe. from cadillac. the new standard of the world.

a lot of raw politics to talk about tonight. the republican party's tea party turnabout, it unfolded before our eyes following christine o'donnell's upset in the delaware senate primary. the establishment of which many members backed mike castle, originally offered tepid support, but that changed today, with gop chairman michael steele now saying o'donnell has the full backing of the committee. also senatorial chairman john cornyn said he and the committee strongly stand by her, though they issued a tepid congratulations laftd night. today senator cornyn said the committee is giving o'donnell the maximum donation of $42,000. we'll find out what some republicans on capitol hill are saying behind closed doors in a moment. right now it seems karl rove is the only one still publicly criticizing o'donnell, quote, she's made nutty statements in the past, and last night he made it clear he thinks she's the wrong choice for the party. listen. >> christine o'donnell is now going to have to answer in the general election that she didn't

have to answer in the primary is her own checkered background. i've got to tell you, i wasn't frankly impressed as her abilities as a candidate. it does conservatives little good to support candidates who at the end of the day, while they may be conservative in their public statements, do not advance the characteristics of rectitude and truthfulness. i'm for the republican but i've got to tell you, we were looking at eight to nine seats in the senate. we're now looking at seven to eight. >> sarah palin responded to rove, telling him and others who dismiss o'donnell to, quote, buck up. democrats hope the infighting helps them. plenty of democrats are concerned about the energy unleashed by tea party activists. with me now is texas representative ron paul whose son, obviously, rand paul is running for senate in kentucky and is a tea party favorite. congressman, thanks very much for being with us. what do you think of christine o'donnell? do you think she can win? >> oh, sure, i think she can win. i think she's going to have to work very hard. she has the roughest job of all the tea party candidates because

she's in a more liberal state. it's -- she has a much more difficult job than my son has in kentucky or angle has in nevada. so, no, but she can win. there's a lot of unhappiness in this country. and for that reason, the numbers are just coming together. democrats are disillusioned, they're not going to show up, the republicans are, and the tea party people are added on to the republicans because a lot of them haven't been involved before. they're independents and it adds to it. it isn't taking away from the republicans. if you have a republican base, the tea party people add on to it. that's why she has a very good chance. >> so democrats saying tonight this is great for the democratic party, you think they're measuring the drapes too early? >> if i talk to republicans and they sounded a little too cocky, that's what i would tell them. i don't think anybody should get -- they should wait and see. i used to run track and i always assumed somebody was going to step on me if i didn't keep running. so that's the way it is in politics.

keep running and not assume you can glide to victory. >> it's not over until it's over. a number of tea party activists who i've talked to in the last couple days and before this primary were saying, look, even if she can't win, it's still important that she won. and we don't really care if she can't win. it's important to make a point. it's important to vote your principles. do you think that's true or do you think it's more important to get a safe republican seat in the senate? >> i think both is true. i think the fact that she won is very important and we should be glad about that. but also you should go for the winning. but i guess you're suggesting that, if you knew she couldn't win, therefore, you should cop out and bend your principles. well, i'm not one that would endorse that very easily because my goal in life has been to nudge people over to a more principled position, whether it has to do with foreign policy or civil liberties or economic policies, so that's always been my goal. so i think winning along with those goals and those principles of course is the ideal situation. >> is there room in the

republican party today for, you know, a mike castle who some would call a moderate republican or what some in the tea party would say is a liberal republican or a democrat who calls themselves a republican. but is there room for a mike castle in the republican party today? >> sure. probably depends on the state it's going to be much tougher because we live in revolutionary times. what we're witnessing today is change coming from the grassroots. i have noticed over the many years that presidential candidates always campaign on change and they never get it. but change, real change only comes philosophically from the grassroots when the people endorse certain views or condemn certain views. and that's what's happening this time. this only happens once maybe in two or three lifetimes. >> and you really believe this is a revolutionary time? >> oh, yeah. but it's economics. i see everything in terms of economic policies, and that's what drives everybody. that's what makes people so angry and upset. you think if there were no economic problems this would be going on? this is the end of keynesianism.

it's been with us 70 years and it's failing. even the liberals know it's failing. it's sort of like revolutionary end of an age with the downfall of the soviet system. it finally just didn't work. you didn't have to fight anymore. it didn't come from the leaders. it came from the grassroots and that's what's happening right now. the grassroots knows that government fails. even today statistics say hardly anybody trusts the government anymore. and good reason. >> what about -- >> it doesn't function. it doesn't have the right system anymore. >> there are those who say, well, look, what about actually getting things done in washington? i mean, that compromise is essential in politics, that no matter what you need at some point to compromise with someone on the other side of the aisle or someone even within your own party to effect change. do you think that's true? and do you think these new voices, those who have been elected by the tea party and their supporters, do you think they're going to be willing to compromise on things? >> well, i don't think we have to -- have to compromise.

i think you build coalitions. i work a lot with democrats on foreign policy and civil liberties, so i think coalitions are very good. but compromise, yes, if i want to eliminate the income tax and the other side wants to reduce it 50%, i would say, well, you know, if it's reduced 50%, that's not bad. that's a good compromise. but if somebody else wants to double your taxes, and somebody says, it's not doubled, let's just increase it by 25%, i don't deal with those compromise. always compromise with people in your goals which, to me, is perfecting liberty, increasing individual liberty and the free marketplace. when you compromise moving in that direction and working with coalitions, that's quite a bit difference. but if you work coalitions and you know, i've worked with the various ones like barney frank and dennis kucinich and others in trying to promote an agenda. and this is seen as compromise. it's not exactly compromise. but i think the people in the country see this as good because you can work together and find out what you agree on.

i think the war issue is a great issue that -- and you know, the federal reserve has been something. i had tremendous support from democrats. i had 320 members of congress sign on to that bill. so that is what i think is important. but i didn't have to compromise my principles. >> as a sitting member of congress, given the anger out there, obviously you have a lot of support among and sort of, you know, a lot of credit among tea party activists. but do you think some republican congress people are concerned about being seen as too moderate, as being seen as being too willing to compromise? >> by the tea party people, you mean? >> yeah. >> yeah, i think that's it, but i just think that we're moving in the right direction. i think the most magnificent thing is that this revolution is going on and the people have discovered it, and they're not blaming the average citizen. they're blaming washington. that's why republicans and democrats are losing. but the most important thing for me is having something to say or

having some influence on what the message should be. right now the message is, washington has messed up, and we have to do something. they spend too much money. government is too big. we have to reduce the size and scope of government. but then on the finer points is where the discussion is going on, and i don't like the idea of having one kingpin either dictating what erybody believes in. i think it should be grassroots and that is good. but in my modest way, what i'll try to do is get the tea party people to think about, you can't cut back spending if you don't think about foreign policy and bringing troops home and ending endless war, you know, and we should as conservatives be concerned about civil liberties. those are the kind of things very important to me, and the grassroots in the tea party movements are very open to that, even though i would admit they don't all agree with that because a lot of other republicans now have gotten involved, and they -- and they want it to be the old republican agenda. >> right. >> and the tea party people don't like that, and they can see through this. and one thing is, if some of

these people get elected and they don't do as expected, if they keep voting for big government and more taxes, they're going to be held accountable this go around. >> congressman ron paul, always good to talk to you. thank you, sir. >> thank you. the inside story about the astounding turnaround. now embracing christine o'donnell. what our sources are telling us about the gop's change of opinion in the tea party candidate. and peaceful protests with big brother watching, how one state's homeland security department was spying on law abiding citizens. he gas in the ♪ ♪ check the flava from your shirt ♪ ♪ make sure your pits don't stank ♪ ♪ check the new hairdo, check the mic one two ♪ ♪ 'cause i'm about to drop some knowledge right on top of you ♪ ♪ you check a lot of things already why not add one more ♪ ♪ that can help your situation for sure ♪ ♪ check your credit score ♪ free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ free-credit-score ♪ you won't regret it at all! ♪ check the legal y'all. >>offer applies with enrollment in triple advantage.®

hi, ellen! hi, ellen! hi, ellen! hi, ellen! we're going on a field trip to china! wow. [ chuckles ] when i was a kid, we -- we would just go to the -- the farm. [ cow moos ] [ laughter ] no, seriously, where are you guys going? ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! [ female announcer ] the new classroom. see it. live it. share it. on the human network. cisco.

(announcer) everything you need to stay balanced on long trips. residence inn.

before the break we told you about the republican party's flip-flop over -- or some members. christine o'donnell's victory. now they're embracing her. it's a vivid illustration of the bases and has the leadership running scared. our sources have been digging for facts. senior congressional correspondent dana bash and senior political analyst gloria bulger joined me earlier. we've seen a lot of back and forth with support for o'donnell. the senatorial committee putting out a tepid congratulations to her. what have you heard today from your sources? they appear to be now rallying around her. >> reporter: privately, nothing has changed. republicans who want to win that seat are still very unhappy that christine o'donnell won and that mike castle didn't. in the words of one source i

talked to today, yesterday their polls showed that castle winning by 11 points and o'donnell losing by 11 and that has not changed today. however, and this is the big however, despite that, they understand that the most critical thing going forward to november is winning, not just in delaware, but across the country. and sources i talked to today said the last thing they realized this morning when they woke up, the last thing they need is to try to tamp down on some of that energy that they're seeing that they need to get out there against democrats in november. >> so the national republican senatorial committee is giving the maximum $42,000. there's a lot more they could do. what should we be looking for in the weeks ahead? >> i talked with a senior strategist involved in these senate campaigns, and he said to me, look. we could give her more money, a couple weeks down the line. they've got another $180,000 they might be able to give her somewhere along the line. they could even give her more money for so-called independent

expenditure that could be used for campaign ads. but here's the big thing, anderson. they don't want to waste their money. they're very pragmatic. if it looks like she's a viable candidate, and by that he said to me if she's within single digits of the democrat, then they're going to throw some money at her. but if she's not a viable candidate, why do they want to waste their money or waste their time? they were mad about this race. they've accepted that she's won. it sounds like the stages of grief, but they're not willing to throw money at something they think could be a lost cost. >> is that why karl rove is the only one still continuing to say negative things about o'donnell publicly, because he's not in office? >> what he's saying is that she's not a credible candidate. he's saying that in a general election campaign, she has some ethical issues, questions of how she's spent campaign money, why

-- her college degree, questions about whether she got a college degree or not, or when she got it still linger. he thinks all of these questions are going to be raised in a general election campaign and that it could really be trouble for her. so his feeling is, is this the way a conservative movement wants to introduce itself to the american people? you want credible candidates. you didn't hear him say that about rand paul. you didn't hear him say that about joe miller in alaska. but you're hearing him say it about her because he doesn't think she's a good candidate to represent conservatives or the republican party. it really has very little to do with establishment, not establishment. it has to do with who she is. >> gloria borger, dana bash, thank you. democratic national committee shairm tim kaine says he's loving the gop turmoil. he told "the new york times," quote, republicans thought they were embracing the tea party and it turns into the donner party.

despite democratic hopes of republican cannibalism, however, the enthusiasm of tea party supporters should worry democrats in november. joining me, eliot spitzer, former new york governor and co-host of "parker/spitzer." also republican consultant and political contributor alex castellanos, and dana lash, also the co-organizer of the st. louis tea party coalition. appreciate you all being with us. eliot, robert gibbs said, and i quote, that this shows there's a very vociferous debate going on in the republican party for the hearts and minds of the republican voters. is he right? >> of course he's right but he's the victim of that debate because the debate has created enthusiasm, energy, the tea party is take over the republican party in many states. in delaware, not so clear. but democrats are saying we're no longer setting the agenda and the fear democrats have is this enthusiasm, even for candidates who karl rove admits are not credible from many other perspectives, they continue through november, and this could be a tsunami that nobody could possibly have predicted. >> dana, do you think o'donnell is credible? do you think she can win?

>> i do think she can win. i think she can win as soon as people like karl rove stop going on television and trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. we haven't even begun to try yet. i liked michael steele's approach. i can't believe i'm saying this, but i think karl rove could take notes from how michael steele approached this. but that doesn't help going on camera saying that a candidate isn't credible and just talking about how, well it took her two decades to pay off her college loans. well, forgive her for not being rich like you, karl rove. but you want to talk about winning moderates and independents, that's not the way to go about it. it's really bizarre. >> that's not the only measure of credibility. i don't think karl rove is focusing exclusively on can she win. i think there's a reputational harm he is worried about when the republican party that has a mike castle who has been a serious thoughtful public servant is defeated by somebody whose views on issues seem to be completely disparate and far afield from normal ideas that are tethered to fact and reason. i think that is what karl rove is scared about. there's a reputational hit the

republican party will really suffer from if they embrace candidates like this. >> alex, are you concerned about this? >> no, i think it demonstrates a lot of energy in the republican party. this is an anti-establishment year, anti-washington year. people look at these qualified people we have in washington and working together in a bipartisan way, and in a bipartisan way they've spent the country into bankruptcy. they've put us in debt for -- that will take forever to pay, so they want it to stop. and that's what you're seeing, i think, this year is a populist, a revolt against the establishment of both parties, and they've just eaten the republican establishment for a snack. now dinnertime is november and only democrats are going to be on the menu. >> that's a great metaphor and i applaud you for it. the problem is the closest metaphor i think many people can see historically is to the know nothing party of the 1840s and '50s which was a populist uprising of anger and venom against the establishment. it burned out quickly when

economic times returned to normal. in that case, it turned to anti-immigrant fervor -- >> there's another historical precedent, governor spitzer. i think there's a much larger historical precedent and that's a country founded by a group of people that didn't want to be told what to do by an elite royalty that thought it had the answer to everything. and right now washington is doing that. it's bankrupted the country and right now people are really concerned about it. i think the republican party just got a wake-up call that said, look, we don't want to send a message out that says we're more concerned about keeping our power in washington than listen to republicans. >> dana, do you think it's going to burn out? >> i don't, and mr. spitzer said something that was very interested that this isn't tethered in fact or reality. i have to point out that mike castle is a very established beltway candidate for sure but he's also a candidate whose record differed from where the majority of americans polled, where they fall. the majority of people are more identifying with the grassroots

movement than they are with people like mike castle. i mean, there was a rasmussen poll taken in august where something like 75% of -- or thought that the congressional democrat agenda was too extreme. and then you look at all of the tracking that has been taking place, gallup released a poll also in august showing majority of independents are favoring the republican party, meaning they're favoring the grassroots conservative candidates that are really actually providing a difference in parties. >> you're talking -- >> mike castle is democrat light. >> you're talking persuasively about poll numbers. i'm not talking now about poll numbers or what might happen in a moment in one election at one moment in time. what i'm talking about is the seriousness of confronting deficits with policies that will really do something about it. bill clinton who gave us a surplus versus george bush whose tax cuts created this. i think the difference is facts that at the end of the day will emerge that will shed light -- i think ron paul is a fascinating

guy, but when he says keynesianism is dead, he just is simply fundamentally wrong. what is dead is the perception of libertarianism that he was a proponent of that took us over the cliff in terms of an economic crisis as close to a depression as we've had in 80 years. >> and t.a.r.p. has been supporting policies which tripled our deficits. >> excuse me, there's something out there happening much bigger than the tea party. the tea party is certainly a part of it, but there's a new generation of republican candidates out there. you have independent business women, outsiders in california, meg whitman, carly fiorina, kelly ayotte in new hampshire, bob mcdonnell in virginia, chris christie in new jersey, scott massachusetts. all these new candidates have one thing in common. they're outsiders. they're fresh faces and they don't want to grow washington's economy, they want to grow america's economy. they want to stop taking money out of the american people's

economy and sending it to washington. >> let me make something clear. >> the tea party is the easiest part to focus on because it's got the brightest feathers and most colorful, but it's much bigger than that. that's why republicans are probably going to gain something like 52, 53 seats. >> i could not agree with you more. >> ask americans about keynesianism being dead, they're voting on it this election. >> i could not agree with you more about growing private sector job creation versus government, and that is what smart politics is all about. what i'm saying is the policies coming out of the tea party are so disassociated from reality. in terms of what it takes to do it. if you sit down with meg whitman, business leaders who have grown business, run business, they will tell you what the tea party is talking about and what ron paul is talking about is simply contrary to good economics, and i would suggest to you that the nations right now whose growth is outstripping us by huge margins, whether it's india, vietnam, japan, even france and germany, you look at what they are doing,

you would find out your perspective is being proven dead wrong by what economics is -- >> want to give dana the last thought. >> excuse me, with all due respect, you can't say that economic policy which talks about spending billions of dollars, for yet another stimulus after we spent 11 frillyin dollars that contributed to that high unemployment, you can't say that's good economic policy and those are all things which the grassroots movement is vehemently against. that's not good economics, that's irresponsible and that's fact. >> the reason that was necessary was because of the deregulatory policies, libertarian policies that were put in place by tea party-like false regulators like alan greenspan and larry summers. >> you mean like chris dodd? >> absolutely. i agree with that. >> fannie mae and freddie mac and things like that. >> i agree with that. that was not genuine government smart policy. i agree with that critique.

>> spitzer advice to democrats, spend more. i love it. >> no, no, it's not spending, it's -- what you're saying simply doesn't work. >> i hope that narrative keeps on going. >> good to have you on, thanks very much. a quick reminder, don't miss "parker/spitzer" 8:00 eastern time october 4th every weekday thereafter until the competition cries uncle, i guess. still ahead, revelation that has pennsylvania's governor fuming. one thing to keep an eye on potential terrorists, but another to conduct surveillance on ordinary americans. we'll tell you what this is all about and the fallout that's followed. plus bp back on the hot seat. tony hayward grilled in london, insisting shortcuts were not taken to save money. remote keyless entry and turn-by-turn navigation available in every model. so it must be hard for you to hear autoweek.com say our interior raises the small-car bar. if you want to talk about it, call me... that is you know when you get home... since you don't have bluetooth in every model. the all new chevrolet cruze. starting under $17,000. get used to more.

♪ to everyone who wants to go to college and everyone who started college but never finished... to late bloomers... full-time moms... and everyone who is good at something but wants to be great. welcome to kaplan university. the university that's changing the face of education... to undergraduate degrees, graduate degrees... degrees that can give you a leg up... in a tough job market... in any job market... welcome. welcome to kaplan university. call kaplan university now or visit us on-line to take our free learning assessment.

our points from chase sapphire preferred are worth 25% more on travel. we're like forget florida, we're going on a safari. so we're on the serengeti, and seth finds a really big bone. we're talking huge. they dig it up, put it in the natural history museum and we get to name it. sethasauraus. really. your points from chase sapphire preferred are worth 25% more on travel? means better vacations. that's incredible. believe it...with chase sapphire preferred your points are worth 25% more on travel

when booked through ultimate rewards. affect wheat output in the u.s., the shipping industry in norway, and the rubber industry, in south america? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex global economy. it's just one reason 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment objectives, risks, fees, expenses, and other information

to read and consider carefully before investing. i don't know if you've seen these pictures. that looks like a gravel road. those are all fish. dead fish. it's a major fish kill in plaquemines parish, thousands and thousands of them. a question is, is there a link to the bp spill? meanwhile, other important stories we're following. isha sesay joins us for the "360 bulletin." >> hi, anderson. president obama is turning up the pressure on congressional republicans over the economy. today he criticized senate republicans for holding up his $42 billion plan to aid small businesses. but he also praised two gop senators for breaking with their leadership to move the bill forward today. meanwhile, the president plans to bypass's senate and appoint elizabeth warren as his special adviser to help set up a new consume procedure techs agency under the wall street

reform bill. if he officially nominated warren to run the agency, she'd have to be confirmed by the senate in a potentially bruising battle. tony hayward of bp denied today the company installed only one blowout preventer on the broken well in the gulf to save money. he told a parliamentary committee in london the single blowout preventer which failed should have worked and the oil industry needs to know why it didn't. and, anderson, this was no cat stuck up a tree. firefighters in oregon were called to rescue a 1,500-pound camel that fell into a sinkhole. his name is moses. he was said to be calm while he was pulled out of the hole. clearly not very happy. thankfully, moses is okay. >> i read this, the camel is one of several camels owned by a pastor or pastors, which i guess hence the name moses. but i'm surprised, camels spit. >> they can be miserable. >> they can be miserable animals.

i love animals, but they spit a lot. >> they're miserable, grumpy and they smell. you're not going to find an advocate for the camels. >> those adjectives also describe me. miserable, grumpy and smell. >> i'll leave that there. >> please do. the government spying on ordinary americans in the name of homeland security. happening in pennsylvania, and the groups targeted certainly don't sound like a threat to national security. wait until you hear who is getting investigated. and a picture of environmental disaster that's got to be seen to be believed. i'm stunned by these images. massive fish kill in louisiana. (announcer) energy security. climate protection. challenges as vast

as the space race a generation ago. and vital to global security. to reach this destination, our engineers are exploring every possibility. from energy efficiency to climate monitoring. securing our nations clean energy future is all a question of how. and it is the how that will make all the difference.

an everyday moment can turn romantic at a moment's notice. and when it does, men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident... in their ability to be ready with cialis. with two clinically proven dosing options, you can choose the moment that's right for you... ... and your partner. 36-hour cialis and cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a low-dose tablet... you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. day or night. tell your doctor about your medical condition... ... and all medications and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed back ache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away.

36-hour cialis or cialis for daily use. ask your doctor if cialis is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com.

what if you learned that the government was spying on you? reporting on you as a potential threat simply because you went out and protested something? well, tonight that's exactly what people in the commonwealth of pennsylvania are learning. a private security contractor hired by the state homeland security department paid for by taxpayers, compiled a list of what they seemed to believe were potentially threatening groups and reported them to law enforcement. the groups they targeted? as you'll see they weren't exactly al qaeda or even al

capone. pennsylvania's governor ed rendell says he just found out about it and he's furious. >> good lord. and to think that we spent $125,000 on this is, at a time when every penny is dire for us, is a further embarrassment. >> we're going to talk to the governor in just a moment. he's ending the contract with the security firm and he's apologizing to pennsylvanians. but first, i want to show you a little bit about the contractor that was hired and what groups they apparently considered a threat. i think it's going to surprise you. the contractor is this group, the institute of terrorism research and response. it's an american-israeli nonprofit. their website is terrorresponse.org. the guy with the gun, it looks all official, someone playing chess down here. take a look. here is their mandate from the federal government, from the department of homeland security's own website. the mandate sounds legit. it's to protect this stuff, the food supply, dams, chemical plants, crucial, critical infrastructure that if destroyed in the words of the department of the homeland security would have a debilitating effect on the security of the country.

so far, so good. now, this is what some of what the outfit came up with. this is pennsylvania intelligence bulletin number 131 which they wrote. one of the groups they're warning about are animal rights activists of philadelphia planning to demonstrate peacefully at what they call the worst of the worst. what is the worst of the worst? well, it's the lulu shrine rodeo in plymouth meeting, pennsylvania. this is where they were going to protest. this is what this contractor was so concerned about. now, other bulletins, done by the contractor warned about events like this one. this is the gay pride festival of central pennsylvania. this is a picture from last year's event. not sure what this has to do with critical infrastructure they were so concerned about. there were plenty of groups targeted, protesting against gas drilling in the shale deposits, education protesters, even pacifists. governor rendell spoke with us about this earlier tonight. governor, you've said this is

embarrassing. what particularly upset you about this? >> well, because we paid out $125,000 for a yearly contract to get information about rallies that are basically just protest rallies. and our job, pennsylvania homeland security department, is supposed to carry out the federal mandate to report any credit -- when there's credible evidence of threats to critical infrastructure, we're supposed to report that to local law enforcement and the holders of the infrastructure themselves. but there's no evidence that at any of these protests there was any threat to infrastructure at all, or any critical infrastructure. no credible evidence. to give you an example, anderson, it was disseminated to local law enforcement that there was a gay and lesbian pride festival. now, good lord. what threat to critical infrastructure? >> some have suggested -- some have suggested that they were alerting law enforcement for that because there could be

counterprotesters who didn't like gays and lesbians and would cause violence. have you heard that or is that just a spin? >> that's a spin. and remember, the task, the mandate to us at pennsylvania homeland security is not to take care of situations like that, but to take care of credible threats to critical infrastructure. >> do you know how the security company chose what groups to try to gather intelligence to report on? because like you say, they focus on groups opposing to drilling. they didn't seem to have any concern about groups who, you know, who are in support of drilling. >> that's correct. and again, there was not one shred of credible evidence that any of these groups posed any threat to the wells, et cetera. >> apparently these reports were forwarded not just to police and law enforcement but private companies like these gas companies about the groups who oppose them. i guess the argument for that is, well, there was some vandalism against some of these

companies and therefore this was security. but for the gay group, if it was supposedly to, you know, fear of protecting them, nobody seemed to have forwarded these reports to the gay group out of their own -- >> of course not. and even the supposed vandalism, there was no credible evidence that any of the protesters had anything to do with the vandalism. >> you said you just found out about this. there was a column written in the "philadelphia inquirer" about two months ago. he wrote those out of the loop might be alarmed to read the bulletin which warns trouble spots of pro-education rallies, anti-gun demonstrations and the coming of the circus and he goes on to identify the group as the firm collecting the information. did you -- did you see that article? did anyone in your office tell but that article? >> no, and i don't mean to offend mr. rubin but i try to read the major stories in every newspaper in pennsylvania every day. that didn't get -- >> when did you find out about this? >> i woke up yesterday morning and it was on the front page of "the harrisburg patriot." i immediately called my scheduler and said i want to see

these folks at 5:00 in the afternoon. that was the earliest i could see them. i listened for a second. i found it to be total bs and i told them we're terminating the contract and not disseminating any of this information again. >> you're standing by your state homeland security director. a guy named james powers. >> i'm not standing by him, he made a mistake in judgment. >> there's some who say he should be fired. >> well, sure. our reaction to things like this in government is always, let's fire somebody to show we've taken action. let's fire somebody. well, mr. powers made a mistake. but he's supposed to be supervised by the pennsylvania emergency management agency. they sure as hell made a mistake. the state police knew this was going on. they sure as heck made a mistake. i'd be firing people left and right. >> what is your message to those protesters? >> i said yesterday, i apologize to each and every one of the groups that were listed on that sheet. it shouldn't have been done and it's not going to be done any more. >> governor rendell, appreciate your time. thank you.

>> thanks, anderson. still ahead, building a better car wash that's both clean and green and profitable. tonight's one simple thing just ahead. [ dr. banholzer ] every once in awhile

there's a moment where everything comes together. where there's magic. and you now understand what nature's been hiding. ♪ at dow we understand the difference between innovation and invention. invention is important. it's the beginning. it's the spark. but innovation is where we actually create value for dow, for society, and for the world. ♪ at dow, we're constantly searching for how to use our fundamental knowledge of chemistry to solve these difficult problems. science is definitive. there is a right answer out there. [ male announcer ] the same 117 elements do the fundamental work of chemistry. ♪ the difference, the one element that is the catalyst for innovation, the one element that changes everything

is the human element. ♪

in tonight's "one simple thing," car washes going green. customers want clean cars but with a clear conscience. >> reporter: one easy way to tell whether your car wash is green is to look at the way it handles the dirty water that comes off your car. some newer facilities have figured out a way for it to be recycled. >> we have a state of the art claim system. we recover 95% of our wash water. that combined with the better chemistry in the car wash chemicals allows us to really take the environment in the hand when we wash cars. >> reporter: running his own car through, he acknowledged some of the old chemicals are cheaper and worked better, but at a price. >> acid and special hydrophloric as it is very dangerous. so we end up paying more for safer chemicals than we would for more dangerous ones. >> reporter: is this where the water is getting recycled? >> this is and now we're going